War Within the ACLU

[Blue_Tires]

Heard part of the interview on NPR today...Good amount of fireworks, and Kaminer is scary-shrill (says the ACLU has become too much of a "liberal human rights and social justice organization...")...However, if (and I mean BIG IF) what she alleges is true, then this is a cause for concern...

============
============
The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU, has long been a house divider in American politics: a love-it-or-hate-it crusader for the defense of liberties even when unpopular.

Since 9/11 and the “war on terror” response, ACLU membership and contributions have soared as more Americans feared for their liberties. It should be the ACLU’s finest hour. Some say it has been.

Wendy Kaminer says no. The former ACLU board member says the ACLU itself has lost its way, compromised its mission. She’s out with a scathing critique, from the inside.

This hour, On Point: an inside charge of an ACLU gone wrong.

You can join the conversation. Do you see the ACLU as a beacon or a bane? Have you joined since 9-11? Have you heard, seen, been part of the infighting? Tell us what you think — here on this page, on Twitter, and on Facebook.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests:

From New York we’re joined by David France, contributing editor to New York Magazine. He covered the ACLU’s post-9/11 infighting for the magazine in “Freedom to Backstab.”

Joining us in our studio is Wendy Kaminer is a writer, lawyer, and social critic. She served on the national ACLU board from 1999 to 2006 and became disillusioned with the leadership and direction of the organization. Her new book is “Worst Instincts: Cowardice, Conformity, and the ACLU.” On Point news analyst Jack Beatty calls it “devastating … a study … of how good organizations, blinded by the righteousness of their mission, do bad things.”

From Omaha, Nebraska, we’re joined by Tim Butz. He was executive director of the ACLU of Nebraska from 2000 to 2006. He served on the Executive Directors Council, a liaison between the ACLU national office and the state affiliates. He is still a member and donor to the ACLU.

http://www.onpointradio.org/2009/04/a-war-within-the-aclu

[Blue_Tires]

1. found a puff-piece book review from the WSJ, of course...

A Limited Love of Liberty
By John Leo

When the American Civil Liberties Union comes under attack, the salvos are often launched from the right. The ACLU, after all, is as enthusiastic about protecting the interests of feminists, gays, abortionist-rights campaigners and immigrants, legal or illegal, as it is uninterested in preventing the abuse of anti-abortion protesters, the censorship of media conservatives and the bullying of college evangelical groups for their opposition to homosexuality. On the right, the phrase "card-carrying member of the ACLU" is an insult; on the left, it is a credential.

But now comes an anti-ACLU barrage from an unusual source: a prominent liberal. Wendy Kaminer, a lawyer, astute social critic and contributor to the Nation magazine and National Public Radio, is also a former member of the ACLU national board. She left the organization in disgust in 2006 and has recorded her grievances in "Worst Instincts: Cowardice, Conformity, and the ACLU." It is a short, vehement book. Even the cover photo is vehement: It shows a densely packed herd of sheep -- stand-ins for the "easily herded" board members and donors who, Ms. Kaminer says, have allowed the ACLU to unravel under the leadership of Anthony Romero. The board and donors, she says, have willfully overlooked the "skullduggery" that has beset the national office since Mr. Romero's installation as executive director in 2002.

But Ms. Kaminer saves most of her venom for Mr. Romero himself. He is dishonest and secretive, she says; he withholds crucial information from the board of directors and misuses the organization's now vast wealth, which was largely built on anti-Bush donations and handouts to encourage "diversity" work. Mr. Romero's management style, she claims, is to reward personal loyalty, deter internal dissent and tighten control over the ACLU affiliates around the country.

While on the board, Ms. Kaminer bluntly criticized the organization; she soon became a punching bag for Romero loyalists, as did the outspoken Michael Meyers, a fellow board member. In 2005, Mr. Meyers lost his bid for re- election, and Ms. Kaminer later chose not to run for another term, possibly because she was almost certain to lose.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124052903980550357.html

[spanone]

2. good time to attack the aclu since they were responsible for the release of the torture memos

http://www.aclu.org/safefree/torture/34747prs20080401.html

[Blue_Tires]

4. good point

i've been searching the innernettes to try and figure out what this woman's true motivations are...sadly the aclu boards are down now...

[Hannah Bell]

5. If memory serves, Kaminer is related to some interesting people - I'll try to confirm my

failing memory.

[Hannah Bell]

8. can't find anything on her family, but i'd swear i once read her brother (?)

was some high-flying shark stockbroker.

[Blue_Tires]

3. another axe-grinding op-ed

The ACLU Shirks Another Free Speech Fight

As the U.N. Human Rights Council endorses punishing blasphemy, why is our supposed free speech advocate staying silent?

Perversely promoting censorship as a human rights initiative, the United Nations Human Rights Council recently adopted a resolution prohibiting defamation of religion. The resolution is non-binding, but not without effect; its passage is becoming something of an annual U.N. tradition, and as several commentators have noted, it legitimizes draconian punishments for blasphemy meted out in sponsoring nations, like Pakistan.

It has evoked sharp and worried criticism from some free-speech advocates and an unusually ecumenical coalition of NGOs, including atheist, Jewish and Christian groups. But one prominent group with a growing human rights agenda and a professed commitment to freedom of conscience and speech opted not to oppose the religious defamation resolution--the American Civil Liberties Union. As The Forward observed in an Oct. 10, 2008 article, the ACLU declined to join a free-speech coalition against the U.N. resolution.

http://www.forbes.com/2009/04/20/aclu-free-speech-opinions-contributors-blasphemy.html

[Canuckistanian]

14. Nothing wrong with blasphemy

Check my sig line.

[readmoreoften]

6. Sounds like some right-wing garbage. /nt

[aikoaiko]

7. I'll be happy with the ACLU when they get correct on the 2nd Amendment.

I can't believe they still cling to their "collective right" interpretation of the 2nd even after the Heller decision.

I hope they fix that, and continue to do great work.

[virginia mountainman]

10. Agreed.....

No support from me, till they recognize the WHOLE, Bill of Rights, without exception.

Instead of picking and choosing over it like a cheap Chinese Buffet.

[Blue_Tires]

11. where in Va do you live??

[virginia mountainman]

13. In the Southwest part. Near Wythville...

Glad to see a fellow Virginian in here!

:toast:

[beevul]

12. The ACLU needs to read Rhode Islands free press clause, methinks.

Compare the free-press clause of the 1842 Rhode Island Constitution: “The liberty of the press being essential to the security of freedom in a state, any person may publish his sentiments of any subject.” That language — not unlike the Second Amendment’s — of course does not mean that the right to publish one’s sentiments protects only the press. It protects “any person,” and one reason among others that it does so is that a free press is essential to a free society.

Its been amended over time, but the meaning is still the same.

Section 20. Freedom of press. -- The liberty of the press being essential to the security of freedom in a state, any person may publish sentiments on any subject, being responsible for the abuse of that liberty; and in all trials for libel, both civil and criminal, the truth, unless published from malicious motives, shall be sufficient defense to the person charged.

http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/RiConstitution/C01.html


Acording to the ACLU reading of the text, only the press may publish...anything at all.

[old mark]

18. Agree! It was important to the writers of the Constitution, but not

not stylishly left enolugh for the ACLU? Wake up, folks - the times have changed.....
Democrats actually own guns!!!

mark

[stlsaxman]

9. oh- okay... as soon as i read Tom Assbrooks name this all made sense...

yeah... he's an NPR right-wing fuck.

[Political Heretic]

15. Honestly, after listening to the show, it really sounds like a lot of petty infighting

And it sort of reinforces a pretty good (but sad) rule of thumb: the bigger an organization gets, the more it becomes susceptible to corruption, power-grabs, and clique-politics.

Mostly it sounds like some disgruntled people who never liked some other people in the first place choosing to air an orgs laundry in public because they are pissed and bitter about things that are far more personal than the claims of these horrible egregious failings of the ACLU.

Perhaps it is true that internally, they've got some hypocrisy at the top in terms of handling their own org. But bringing the public into an internal spat is just petulant and silly. It's especially sad that its happening now, when we have the ACLU to thank, in large part for the truth on torture, the memos, the photos that are soon to be released and other stuff.

They ACLU isn't perfect, but I have to say after listening to the interview this sounded like a LOT of sour grapes. As such, I was pleased that the ACLU refused to come on the show.

[Tesha]

22. Romero got in trouble early on when...

...he signed a "won't support terrorists" sort of clause
inserted into a funding grant from the Ford Foundation
(which Romero used to run). Eventually, the ACLU
national board got Anthony to see the error of this
but a lot of feelings were hurt along the way. Kaminer's
book is partly an outgrowth of all that.

Tesha (who has met the various parties involved)

[Political Heretic]

23. Right, that was explained in partof the program, and is part of what prompted my opinion.

[TheBigotBasher]

16. You need the ACLU.

I just point you to the abuses of human rights and civil liberties carried out by a supposed Labour Government in the UK. Everything from arrests of the opposition, wide data mining, ignoring the law and election fraud.

Rights removed because of one boogeyman, are rights removed for all.

[Badgerman]

17. Exactly, also remember it is a disparate group...

made up of people with views very different from one another. Have there been some abuses internally as well as perhaps externally, good money says "Without a doubt.". But always keep this squarely in mind, and at the forefront of any argument: the ACLU is almost the ONLY thing standing between you and totalitarians!

[Blue_Tires]

20. welcome to the site!

[omega minimo]

19. yes only those far far far far far lefties care about human rights and social justice

[X_Digger]

21. Am I the only one..

..who noticed an almost 'ends justifies the means' philosophy from Butz? Close to the end, he comes just short of saying "Look, we've got more members and more money, therefore whatever we're doing is right."